Monthly Archives: January 2012

Research Assistant Wanted (Spring 2012)

I would like to hire a 2L or 3L to be my research assistant for 10-15 hours/week during the coming semester.

The work primarily involves assisting me with legal research relating to papers I am writing on privacy and on Internet regulation.

I need someone who can write clearly and is well-organized. If you happen to have some web or programming skills (some or all of WordPress, HTML, MySQL, Perl, Debian), that would be a plus but it is not in any way a requirement.

The pay of $13 / hr is set by the university, and is not as high as you deserve, but the work is sometimes interesting.

If this sounds attractive, please e-mail me the following with the subject line RESEARCH ASSISTANT 2012 (in all caps), followed by your name:

  1. A note telling me
    • How many hours you’d ideally like to work per week
    • When you are free to start.
    • Your phone number and email address.
  2. A copy of your resume (c.v.).
  3. A transcript of your grades (need not be an official copy).
  4. If you have one handy, also attach a short NON-legal writing sample. If you have none, I’ll accept a legal writing sample (whatever you do, though, please don’t send your L-Comm/LRW memo).
Posted in Law School | Comments Off on Research Assistant Wanted (Spring 2012)

Newt Is Even Worse Than You Think

I missed this TPM article on Newt Gingrich’s second wife published back in 2010. He’s not just a serial abandoner of sick wives who dumps them while they hospitalized. It’s so much more.

(Via TPM, The Marianne Bomb Goes Off?)

Posted in Politics: The Party of Sleaze | 2 Comments

SOPA, PIPA, and Internet Blackout Day

I have somewhat mixed feelings about Internet Blackout Day. Much as I sympathize with the motives, I have never much liked campaigns that try to take the oppressor’s symbols (pink triangles, yellow stars, what have you) and turn them around into pride symbols. The origins stick.

Similarly, I get the idea of fighting censorship with quiet. See what censorship will get you? But I still don’t like it. So I’ve run a compromise, with an overlay on this site that you can click through.

The cause is serious. Congress is contemplating two very dangerous Internet blacklist bills: SOPA (in the House) and PIPA (in the Senate). SOPA has been shelved, perhaps only temporarily, but PIPA is still alive and kicking.

EFF’s summary of the issues is right on target:

The “Stop Online Piracy Act”/”E-PARASITE Act” (SOPA) and “The PROTECT IP Act” (PIPA) are the latest in a series of bills which would create a procedure for creating (and censoring) a blacklist of websites. These bills are updated versions of the “Combating Online Infringements and Counterfeits Act” (COICA), which was previously blocked in the Senate. Although the bills are ostensibly aimed at reaching foreign websites dedicated to providing illegal content, their provisions would allow for removal of enormous amounts of non-infringing content including political and other speech from the Web.

The various bills define different techniques for blocking “blacklisted” sites. Each would interfere with the Internet’s domain name system (DNS), which translates names like “www.eff.org” or “www.nytimes.com” into the IP addresses that computers use to communicate. SOPA would also allow rightsholders to force payment processors to cut off payments and advertising networks to cut ties with a site simply by sending a notice.

These bills are targeted at “rogue” websites that allow indiscriminate piracy, but use vague definitions that could include hosting websites such as Dropbox, MediaFire, and Rapidshare; sites that discuss piracy such as pirate-party.us, p2pnet, Torrent Freak, torproject.org, and ZeroPaid; as well as a broad range of sites for user-generated content, such as SoundCloud, Etsy, and Deviant Art. Had these bills been passed five or ten years ago, even YouTube might not exist today — in other words, the collateral damage from this legislation would be enormous.

There are already laws and procedures in place for taking down sites that violate the law. These acts would allow the Attorney General, and even individuals, to create a blacklist to censor sites when no court has found that they have infringed copyright or any other law.

See also EFF’s blacklist site. PIPA is scheduled for a vote in the Senate next Tuesday, so if you are a US citizen this is a good time to call your Senators and tell them to oppose the bills.

Posted in Civil Liberties, Communications, Law: Free Speech, Law: Internet Law | 2 Comments

The Real Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today’s Visionary: An Illustrated Guide to Dr. King’s 21st Century Insights from Crooks & Liars.

Posted in Civil Liberties, Econ & Money | Comments Off on The Real Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Figures

You know that financed-by-Newt-Gingrich-buddies Ultimate Mitt Romney Hit Video I wrote about the other day? Seems it has a few problems, much in keeping with the character of the candidate it is designed to help.

Like, accuracy. The people in Gaffney, SC say say the plant closing featured in the video wasn’t a big deal. Similarly, Marianna, Fla workers cry foul over anti-Romney film.

Posted in 2012 Election | 1 Comment

New York Times Wonders Whether it Should Report Whether Its Sources are Lying

I kid you not.

Should The Times Be a Truth Vigilante?.

Apparently, the Times does not believe, as a matter of its DNA, that if a person in a suit says something, it has any duty to check it out and report on whether that statement is factual.

Writes the Public Editor:

I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

….on the campaign trail, Mitt Romney often says President Obama has made speeches “apologizing for America,” a phrase to which Paul Krugman objected in a December 23 column arguing that politics has advanced to the “post-truth” stage.

As an Op-Ed columnist, Mr. Krugman clearly has the freedom to call out what he thinks is a lie. My question for readers is: should news reporters do the same?

If so, then perhaps the next time Mr. Romney says the president has a habit of apologizing for his country, the reporter should insert a paragraph saying, more or less:

“The president has never used the word ‘apologize’ in a speech about U.S. policy or history. Any assertion that he has apologized for U.S. actions rests on a misleading interpretation of the president’s words.”

Actually, a better form of that paragraph would be

“The president has never used the word ‘apologize’ in a speech about U.S. policy or history. When asked, the Romney Campaign was unable to substantiate Romney’s claim with any examples.”

Brisbane’s column is a head-scratcher. I have never seen such a succinct example of the Stenography Theory of journalism. I do not know how on earth any news organization intends to get money from me on an on-going basis if all it does is an aggregation that my RSS reader can do plus some ordering of importance — which some content-recognition AI will do for me within a decade.

Fact-checking or ruin, people.

Posted in The Media | 8 Comments